Appeal No. 1998-0472
Application No. 08/493,571
The examiner next relies upon McAllister for teaching
the reaction of phenol with formaldehyde in the presence of
a Lewis acid, such as boric acid. In the same manner, the
examiner relies upon Rothrock for teaching the use of boric
acid in a reaction of phenol with formaldehyde. (Answer,
page 6). The examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to conduct an aralkylation of a polyhydroxy aromatic
phenol with the oxalic acid of the German patents,
Oppenlaender, Nelson, and Durairaj, in combination with the
boric acid of McAllister and Rothrock.
Appellant argues that McAllister is directed to a
condensation reaction rather than an addition product as in
the present invention. Appellant also argues that
McAllister is concerned with polyhydric phenols and Hoggins
is concerned with phenols, and therefore no logical nexus
exists between these 2 references. (Brief, page 8). The
examiner rebuts and states that McAllister and Rothrock
disclose the reaction of polyhydric phenols and phenols, and
that therefore, boric acid catalyzes the reaction regardless
of the quantitative phenolic functionality. The examiner
also states that he has relied upon Hoggins for establishing
equivalency of boric acid to catalyze either phenol-
formaldehye reactions or arylkalation reactions, and that
therefore it is a matter of ordinary skill in the art to
employ the boric acid of McAllister and Rothrock together
with the oxalic acid of the German patents, Oppenlaender,
Nelson, and Durairaj, in view of the teaching of Nelson that
mixtures of acid catalysts are suitable in alkylation
reactions. (Answer, page 11).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007